Being Amber Rhea

Well, Creative Loafing finally ran my letter to the editor. Ken Edelstein has a snarky response, which is easy material for those who enjoy fisking and playing “Spot the Logical Fallacy.” I typically don’t enjoy these pastimes, but in this case I can make quick work of a few of the most glaring eye-rollers.

1. “Organizers also asked Nouraee not to expose names and identities of those attending the meeting.”

Well, since I was one of the organizers, I’ll tell you what we actually said. Before the program began, we asked that members of the press not reveal anyone’s name or personal information without their explicit permission. We said that any individual should definitely feel free to agree to an interview; we simply asked that they step away from the program to do it, so as not to disturb others. (E.g., Caitlin was interviewed that night and included in another piece.) So this line about “Wah, he wasn’t allowed to expose anything!” is really stupid and easy to see through.

2. “Later, Nouraee tracked down a woman who was involved directly in an incident with Gower, and he quoted that woman, Cheryl Courtney-Evans, extensively in the article.”

Extensively? Go back and check the article again, Ken. I wouldn’t call a few lines, preceded by several paragraphs devoted to Gower on his nasty soapbox, “extensive.” Give me a break.

Edelstein closes with this, which I guess he intends to be a real zinger:

3. “Another point worth considering: Gower, whom Rhea describes as homophobic, is openly gay.”

You know, people make dumbass arguments like this one all the time, and yet every time I see it, I’m still amazed. (Several commenters on the original CL story trotted it out like a beacon of truth, and were properly taken to task by other commenters.) Gower is openly gay. And?

Just because you’re gay, doesn’t mean you can’t be homophobic. Arguments like this one show a profound lack of understanding of the way privilege and prejudice operate in our society. If you grow up in this society, no matter what your race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, class, etc., you internalize a degree of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and classism because these things operate on a structural level. (Which is why we can’t successfully fight against and dismantle them until we acknowledge them within ourselves.) Sure, Gower probably doesn’t sit up nights entertaining a bunch of consciously homophobic thoughts like, “Hey, I really hate faggots!” Because that’s not how it works. Whatever thoughts he may or may not have are irrelevant. His actions speak for themselves.

This is the same stupid shit as when people say, “I can’t be racist, some of my best friends are black!” Are you fucking kidding me?

And, anyway, let’s just allow for a minute that maybe Gower isn’t homophobic. Maybe he’s done all kinds of examining of societal conditioning and is totally not affected at all by it anymore. Again… so what?? He’s still an asshole, and an extremely dangerous one at that. So I don’t know what this triumphant “He’s gay!” declaration is supposed to prove.

Overall, CL’s continued defense of Gower is puzzling… -well, okay, not really. I don’t think many of us still buy into their self-proclaimed “alternative” status.

Update: Christ on a cracker. I just noticed the letters to the editor page has comments. The good news? A few of the comments there are sensible. The bad/annoying/hilarious (depending on my mood) news? Check out this comment:

Sex Worker Article Comment - It seems that Rhea has a uninformed image of prostitution. A life of a prostitute is nothing like what is portrayed in the movie Pretty Woman. Most prostitution is tragic and the people selling their bodies would probably rather be doing something better with their lives. Tragically, Rhea romanticizes the world of prostition. Internet images and radical ideologies due more harm than good for our public health. She needs to step away from the internet to see the world. She obviously hasnot seen families torn apart due to prostitution. It is very tragic.

Oh, this person knows me so well!

Also, ten points for using the loathsome, worn out, and wholly inaccurate term “selling their bodies.” NEXT!

The new issue of Creative Loafing is out, and they didn’t run my letter to the editor. (I had gotten an email from someone on their staff saying they might run it, which is why I waited before posting anything here.) So here it is. Later I might do a follow-up post where I expand on some of the points and include some other points that I had to cut out in order to keep it around 500 words.

—

I’m writing to express my disappointment with the 1.16.08 feature, “One man’s battle against Midtown prostitutes and their johns,” by Andisheh Nouraee.

There are two separate matters here. The first, and most obvious, is that Gower and Denby are dangerous vigilantes. I am glad that their deplorable tactics are being exposed.

It should go without saying that posting videos of sex workers on YouTube is a horrible idea. What is the goal? Sex workers - especially street prostitutes - are disproportionately the targets of violent crime. Violent criminals target sex workers because they know they can get away with it. (In fact, this was the exact justification given by Gary Ridgway, who was convicted of the murders of over 40 prostitutes.) Gower’s dehumanization of sex workers through his behavior and language perpetuates the cultural mores that make such violence acceptable.

But I am also disappointed with Nouraee’s treatment of the issue. Nouraee learned about Gower’s harassment of street workers at an event I helped organize at Charis Books, commemorating the 5th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. After the program, he spoke with the other two organizers and me and expressed interest in learning more and possibly doing a story.

Nouraee sat through our program that night and listened as people recounted individual encounters with Gower, citing Gower’s blatant homophobia and transphobia. He listened as we discussed the glaring absence of sex workers’ voices in the media, as well as the fact that when sex workers are mentioned in the media, they are either troublemakers or victims - in other words, they’re not people; they’re useful objects in making a point and reinforcing a stereotype.

He spoke with several sex workers that night and a few weeks later, while doing research for this story. He expressed concern about making sure to include sex workers’ voices.

If Nouraee tried to speak with street prostitutes in Midtown and they did not want to speak to him, he could have mentioned it in the article. Reporters do this all the time (”so-and-so declined to comment”). If that were the case, he could also reflect on why sex workers might be wary of talking to a reporter. Could it be because they’re tired of having their words (and existence) twisted to fit whatever agenda is at hand?

Nouraee fails as an investigative reporter with this piece, especially as one for a paper that claims to be alternative. Terms like “transvestitute” and “real female” go unchallenged and uncorrected. Nouraee does not probe Gower about why Gower is so fixated on harassing prostitutes. He does not examine how the criminalization of prostitution perpetuates the violence that many people associate with street prostitution. He does not discuss the societal and economic conditions that lead to many transpeople working on the streets.

For people who are interested in learning more about sex workers’ rights activism, some good sources of information are SWOP-USA, Desiree Alliance, COYOTE and $pread Magazine.

The IDTEVASW event at Charis last night was a success! We had a great turn-out, some inspiring conversation about local action that we can take, and only one technical difficulty. ;)

I was really happy to see how many names were on the contact list by the end of the night! Soon we’ll be putting together some kind of Google group or listserv or something. By this time next year, we should be able to put on a huge, bad-ass event that will get tons of people’s attention!

Thank you to everyone who came out last night and participated. It made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

And of course, thank you to Caitlin and Tabby for all your hard work leading up to yesterday!

Duly noted: the AJC will print “drinking game material for bloggers” tripe like this in their Opinion section, but they won’t print that fresh! new! (gag) content they claim to crave so badly. Anyway, I thought today would be an appropriate day to repost the op-ed I wrote several months ago. Here it is:

Shaming tactics not effective against prostitution

Currently, the Atlanta Police Department’s Web site includes mug shots of women convicted of prostitution and escorting without a permit (”City adviser: ‘Johns’ get too little scrutiny,” Metro, May 21). This tactic is dangerous and ignorant.

Sex workers are disproportionately the victims of violent crime, especially rape and sexual assault. The concept of shame perpetuates the widespread view of sex workers as disposable. Further, the illegality of their profession prevents sex workers from reporting violence perpetrated against them.

How does posting their mug shots benefit women arrested for prostitution? Even if we assume that a woman may be successfully “shamed” out of sex work by having her photo posted, she is still an open target for potential harm by anyone who sees her photo, since the mug shots remain on the Web site for 3 to 6 months.

The current debate, however, does not address the dangers of women’s mug shots being publicly displayed, nor does it advocate for the photos’ removal. Instead, the conversation is centered on the question of why there aren’t any photos of johns on the Web site.

Some cities have adapted a tactic of “shaming” johns by posting their photos online, on television, or on billboards. Stephanie Davis, the mayor’s policy adviser on women’s issues, believes this would be a good solution in Atlanta. But will it work?

In 2005, Oakland, California launched a campaign called Operation Shame, with the same goal as that which Davis suggests for Atlanta. The Oakland campaign displayed johns’ photos on 10 by 22 feet billboards.

After eight months, the billboards disappeared amid protests from constitutional rights activists. The prostitution rate in Oakland did not fluctuate.

Proponents of “end demand” programs claim that these campaigns reduce prostitution without harm to sex workers, deterring men from purchasing sexual services. According to Norma Hotaling of SAGE (Standing Against Global Exploitation), the developer of San Francisco’s John School program, 98% of men going through the program were “rehabilitated.” However, a 2002 study published in the Canadian Journal of Criminology found that such programs have little or no long-term deterrent effect.

In many cases, these programs exemplify misplaced good intentions fraught with paternalism. In the late 1990s, Vancouver stopped arresting street prostitutes and began focusing on johns. The rationale behind the change was that the johns were predators, and the prostitutes were victims. But Andrew Sorfleet, a sex worker and founder of SWAV (Sex Workers’ Alliance of Vancouver), disagrees. He points out that the real predators are men who pretend to be clients in order to rape, beat, or rob sex workers, and adds that the campaign was motivated by “the misconception that sex workers need to be ‘rescued’ - with or without our consent.”

Besides, the idea that shame will discourage a non-desirable behavior isn’t realistic. This is the fundamental flaw behind Davis’s proposal. She believes that posting johns’ photos online “would contribute to the shame that any man who buys sex should feel.”

Adults paying for sexual services from other adults should not be a crime. As the Oakland example shows, shaming does not deter people from paying for or accepting payment for sex. It just makes people stealthier and drives activity further underground, thereby elevating the risk to all involved.

The double standard is at work here - the concept that women who sell sexual services are worthy of public contempt, but the men who pay for those services are not. Davis seeks to address this inequity, but her motivations are based on an assumption that any participation in the sex industry - whether as client or service provider - is contemptible.

In all of this, though, there is one very important set of voices that is missing: the voices of actual sex workers. Policy advisers, APD officials, and op-ed writers can talk ad infinitum about what should or shouldn’t happen. But the people we most need to hear from are the ones whom these policies actually affect on a day to day basis.

I hope all you ATL folks will be able to make it to Charis tonight at 7:00! As a reminder, here’s the pertinent info…

What: 5th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers - film screenings, open mic, and roundtable discussion
When: Tonight, 7:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
Where: Charis Books and More, 1189 Euclid Ave., Atlanta, GA 30307
Why: To draw attention to the global struggle for sex workers’ rights and discuss concrete strategies at the local level!

For more information, please visit www.swopusa.org/dec17 or www.chariscircle.org.

Films we will be showing:

• Measure Q: A Brief History of Sex Workers Outreach Project
• Sorry Your Grandmother Was Mugged, But I Was Busy Arresting A Hooker!

There will be yummy vegan desserts from La Dolce Lulu! Anyone who was at Sex, Wine and Chocolate last month can attest that Lulu makes some delicious cupcakes. See photos here.

More on…

• Facebook
• MySpace
• Upcoming

Hope to see you all tonight!!

Ren has yet another spot-on post, from which I will quote at length, because it is very appropriate given that Monday is the 5th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. (You ATL folks will be at Charis at 7:00 that night, right?)

And god, goddess and all the happy other deities, we can’t have that. We can’t have sex work being a profession. We can’t have sex workers being seen as workers, with rights and legal protections and safer working conditions and representation and recourse. We can’t have them having unions and power and voices. We can’t have them being human. FFS, they sell their bodies, those dirty, dirty whores! We can’t have them being treated with the same humanity and legal status as a steelworker or a miner or a factory worker on an assembly line. Giving their “jobs” any legitimacy, well, that will just cause so many people to rush right into their sleazy trade, just like people are lining up to be steelworkers, ect. Yes, we can say how awful when they are raped, or murdered, or harassed, or beat up, but actually work to give them legal rights, legal recourse, and legal status possessed by so many other humans? Well now, no, we can’t do that. We can’t have them being normalized or anything like that…

You say no woman, no person deserves to be treated like “…..”, but when you say no to sex workers rights, you enable it.

And my precious little deities, what about the men? Giving sex workers these things will just tell the men that they have the right to buy sex! We can’t have them thinking that, even if the woman, or man, or transperson, is selling it willingly! So no, we can’t let sex workers have these things. Bad for the cause you know.

Bad for the cause and our great future one day world. Damn the sex workers in the here and now. After all, to make an omelet, you need to splatter a few eggs. And it’s not like they’re contributing anything worthwhile to society anyway.

December 17, 2007 7:00-8:30pm at Charis Books and More (1189 Euclid Ave NE in the Little Five Points Business District)

December 17th is the 5th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. This event was created to call attention to hate crimes committed against sex workers all over the globe. Please join us as we celebrate this important day of action with a sex worker open mic, a few brief video screenings and inspiring conversation on the movement for sex workers rights, dignity and decriminalization! This event is free and open to everyone; however, to participate as a performer in the open mic, the organizers request that you be a current or former sex worker.

For more information, please visit: www.swopusa.org/dec17 or www.chariscircle.org.

ATL peeps, please spread the word and please come on the 17th if you can make it! I also created an event on Upcoming.

December 17th is the 5th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. This event was created to call attention to hate crimes committed against sex workers all over the globe.

Originally thought of by Dr. Annie Sprinkle and started by the Sex Workers Outreach Project USA in 2003 as a memorial and vigil for the victims of the Green River Killer in Seattle Washington, International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers has empowered workers from over 30 cities around the world to come together and organize against discrimination and remember victims of violence.

During the week of December 17, 2007, sex worker rights organizations will be staging actions and vigils to raise awareness about violence that is commonly committed against sex workers. The assault, battery, rape and murder of sex workers must end. Existing laws prevent sex workers from reporting violence. The stigma and discrimination that is perpetuated by prohibitionist laws has made violence against sex workers acceptable. Please join in drawing attention to this injustice around the world with the 5th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers.

Please check out the new DEC 17 web site.

If you or your organization are holding an event, please email your info.

If your organization would like to help sponsor an event in your local area, please send your contact info.

Please go to the web site for Dr. Annie Sprinkle’s ‘10 Things You Can Do for International Day to end Violence Against Sex Workers.’

We encourage participants to carry red umbrellas on December 17 as a symbol of international solidarity for sex workers’ rights!

***Please post widely***